Maternal and neonatal outcomes after antenatal corticosteroid administration for PPROM at 32 to 33 6/7 weeks gestational age

Sheibani, Lili; Fong, Alex; Henry, Dana; Norton, Mary E.; Truong, Yen N.; Anyikam, Adanna; Laurent, Louise C.; Rao, Rashmi

doi:10.1080/14767058.2016.1222366

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Obstetrical strategies to treat patients with PPROM remain controversial, and the optimal delivery time is unclear [1], which depends on an evaluation of the risks and benefits of attempted pregnancy prolongation compared with expeditious delivery [11]. Due to the different variety of expectant treatment and different quality of medical care, the pregnancy outcomes of patients with PPROM are different [12][13][14][15]. In previous studies, there is a lack of comprehensive observations on maternal and neonatal complications as well as the consideration of grouping patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Maternal and Neonatal Outcome of Patients with Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membranes

Yan

Deng

Hong

2022

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM) increases risk of maternal and neonatal diseases. Expectant treatment is one major treatment for PPROM patients, but it raises concerns on infection. Currently, the optimal delivery time for PPROM patients is still unclear, and there are various outcomes for the patients with PPROM. Previous studies conducted to analyze the pregnancy outcome showed inconsistent results. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively analyze the maternal and neonatal outcomes for comparison among different latency periods of patients with PPROM at a university hospital in China. Method. This was a retrospective study. We divided all patients with PPROM into four groups according to gestational weeks, namely, group A (GA 24–27+6), group B (GA 28–31+6), group C (GA 32–33+6), and group D (GA34-36+6). The maternal and neonatal outcomes of each group were observed, respectively. Groups B and C were separately divided into two subgroups according to the median latency period of each group, namely, B1, B2, C1, and C2. Then, the differences of pregnancy outcomes between B1 and B2, C1 and C2, were compared, respectively. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Result. Group A: the common maternal and neonatal complications were the increased infection index before labour, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia and neonatal respiratory distress syndrome. Groups B, C, and D: the common maternal and neonatal complications were the increased infection index before labour, fetal distress, neonatal pneumonia, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, and patent foramen ovale. Comparison of pregnancy outcome between group B1 and group B2 showed higher incidence rate of increased infection index before labour, lower incidence rate of respiratory distress syndrome, electrolyte disturbance, and premature brain in group B2 than those in group B1. Comparison of pregnancy outcome between group C1 and group C2 showed the higher incidence of increased infection index before labour, bigger birth weight, and shorter hospital stay in group C2 than those in group C1. Conclusion. Increased infection index before labour was common maternal complication in four groups. Neonatal hyperbilirubinemia and neonatal pneumonia were top neonatal complications in four groups. The prolongation of latency period was beneficial to newborns of patients with gestational week at 28–31+6 weeks, while it did not benefit those with gestational week beyond 32 weeks.

show abstract